Against Treating Introspection As Perception-Like

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Against Treating Introspection As Perception-Like Psyche, Volume 16, number 1 Against Treating Introspection as Perception-Like Abstract A perceptual theory of introspection is one that treats introspection as a species of perception or as a special case of perception. Additionally, a perceptual theory of introspection is one for which introspection shares at least some of the essential features of perception. However, I will show that there are certain essential features of perception that introspection lacks. Moreover, those features common to perception and introspection are insufficient to distinguish perception from belief. Thus, there is good reason to deny that introspection fits a perceptual model of introspection. Renee J Smith1 Associate Professor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies Coastal Carolina University A perceptual theory of introspection is one that treats introspection as a species of perception or as a special case of perception. While introspection and perception are dissimilar in certain respects, a perceptual theory of introspection will be based on certain fundamental similarities between them. What I take to be an essential feature of any perceptual theory of introspection is that it takes perception to be a basic mental state, one irreducible to some other mental state. This feature rules out treating perception as a species of belief (what Dretske has called a cognitivist theory of perception) and then likening introspection to perception on the basis that it, too, is a species of belief. This latter view of introspection would be classified as a non-perceptual theory of introspection because while it does reduce introspection to perception, it goes on to reduce perception to belief. A perceptual theory of introspection, in addition to taking perception to be a basic mental state, is one for which introspection shares at least some of the essential features of perception. I will show, however, that there are certain essential features of perception that introspection lacks. In addition, those features common to perception and introspection are insufficient to distinguish perception from belief. Thus, there is good reason to deny that introspection fits a perceptual model of introspection. 1Conway SC 29528-6054 843-349-2083 [email protected] http://ww2.coastal.edu/rsmith Psyche, Volume 16, number 1 Against treating introspection Perception, in the most straightforward case, is seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and touching; namely, it is sense perception. It is acquiring information about our surroundings via our sense organs. Certainly, when we introspect, we do not see, hear, taste, smell or touch our mental states; so, the employment of the sense organs cannot ground a perceptual theory of introspection. Other cases of perception, however, do not fit these stereotypical cases either, for example, proprioception.2 It seems that one can be (perceptually) aware that one’s leg is bent without seeing or touching it, and yet this usually counts as a case of perception. So, rather than thinking of perception as dependent on the sense organs, we might simply think of it as a means of acquiring information about our environment (including what might be called our somatic environment or our non-mental environment.) Since introspection, let us say, is directed inward, and perception seems to be directed outward, what is common to both is that we acquire information about whatever is perceived or introspected. By perceiving something, one stands in a particular relation to the thing seen. Assume that this is a causal relation between the perceptual object and the perceiver.3 So, in order to see a cat, one must be causally related to certain intrinsic properties of the cat. One acquires information about the cat (its location, color, size, and shape) in virtue of standing in this relation to a cat. If cat experiences are produced by something other than cats, then they do not count as perceptual experiences (of cats). This information is then available to be (or to enter into) the content of perceptual belief. Seeing the cat allows one to form the belief that what one sees is a cat. The ability to form perceptual beliefs will be dependent upon possessing certain concepts (e.g. the concept CAT); simply seeing the cat, standing in the perceptual relation to the cat, however, does not seem to be concept-dependent. One can be aware of the cat without being aware that it is a cat. So we should distinguish simple “seeing” (being aware of the cat) from “perception-that” (being aware that it is a cat).4 The latter, unlike the former, is concept-dependent. One could not see that 5 something is a cat unless one had the concept CAT. Additionally, in the case of simple perception, there is an associated appearance or sensation.6 The cat appears to the perceiver in some way; there is something that it is like to be 2 Also, Bach-y-Rita (Dennett, 1991, pp. 338-343) prosthetic devices, which are described as producing perception- like experiences while bypassing the (relevant) sense organs, do not fit. I am inclined to follow Dennett: This is not a case of seeing, but feeling. 3 (Grice, 1961). It will be one thing to say that the perceptual relation is a causal one and quite another to be committed to Grice’s causal theory of perception (as he takes perception to be the perception of a sense datum caused by a material object). Instead, some have emphasized the acquisition of information that occurs in perception rather than the causal relation. (See Dretske, 2000, 1981). 4 Audi (1988, p. 9) and Dretske (2000) have called this both simple seeing and non-epistemic seeing and contrasted it with epistemic seeing described below as perception-that. Crane (1988, 1992), Tye (1995, 2000), and Peacocke (1992, 2001) all endorse the view that perception has nonconceptual content. McDowell (1994) denies this. 5 For present purposes, I will assume that indeterminate concept possession (see Bealer, 1998) is sufficient for perception-that. That is, one need not know the complete analysis of a concept (or, as Bealer says, have intuitions that each true identity claim for the thing in question is true) in order to possess it. Instead, in possessing the concept CAT one need only have the ability to recognize cats, distinguish them from dogs, tables, chairs, and so forth. (Also see Dretske, 1999, 1995, esp. pp. 59-60, 138-139, 1981). 6 Macdonald (1999) denies that appearances or sensations are essential features of perception (or, she says it is possible that they are not) citing McDowell’s 1994 requirement that all experience be conceptualized. (Appearances being unconceptualized experiences, there are no appearances. It is not clear that Macdonald actually endorses this view.) This cognitivist theory of perception (see Dretske, 2000a, chapter 8) bears certain similarities, in this respect, 80 Psyche, Volume 16, number 1 Against treating introspection aware of the cat even if one is not aware that it is a cat. Simple perception, “awareness-of,” has a certain phenomenal character. Just what this phenomenal character is, or what experience has it, is a central question in philosophy. For the time being, however, we might simply describe it as what is common to both veridical and hallucinatory perceptual experience. What is common to both veridical awareness of a cat and hallucinating a cat is that it seems as if there is a cat one sees. One is having an experience of a cat even if one is not (introspectively) aware that what one is having this experience. How these experiences differ is with respect to the role of the perceptual object. In the case of veridical perception, one stands in a causal relation with a cat. When hallucinating a cat, since there is no cat, it is not the perceptual object that causes one’s cat-awareness. While hallucination (and illusion) are similar with respect to their phenomenal character, and differ with respect to the causal role of the object, we can also distinguish them in terms of the relation they bear to perceptual belief and knowledge. Hallucinating a cat may provide the material for one to come to believe what one sees is a cat, since there is no cat, one cannot know that it is a cat one sees. Therefore, while both veridical and non-veridical perception have phenomenal character and provide the basis for belief, they differ in respect to their knowledge- producing effects. What can be known of non-veridical perception is that it seems as if one sees a cat. How things seem is something that would be acquired by introspection. But is this introspective access sufficiently analogous to perception to warrant adopting a perceptual theory of introspection? There does not appear to be any immediate problem with likening introspection to perception on the basis that it, too, is a causal relation between the subject and the object of introspection. If one introspects on one’s experience of seeing a cat, we could say that the visual experience itself is the cause of one’s introspecting it. Assuming perceptual realism that in order to see a cat, the cat must exist (setting aside cases of non-veridical perception for the moment), we could say that in order to introspect a given mental state, for instance a visual experience, it seems reasonable to say that visual experience must exist.7 There does not seem, however, to be anything analogous to simple perception in introspection. That is, while one can be aware of cats and their properties,8 one cannot be aware of experiences or their properties. Introspecting a visual experience, for example, does not involve that experience appearing in any way.9 While it does seem that there is something that it to Armstrong’s 1968 theory of perception.
Recommended publications
  • 'Introspectionism' and the Mythical Origins of Scientific Psychology
    Consciousness and Cognition Consciousness and Cognition 15 (2006) 634–654 www.elsevier.com/locate/concog ‘Introspectionism’ and the mythical origins of scientific psychology Alan Costall Department of Psychology, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO1 2DY, UK Received 1 May 2006 Abstract According to the majority of the textbooks, the history of modern, scientific psychology can be tidily encapsulated in the following three stages. Scientific psychology began with a commitment to the study of mind, but based on the method of introspection. Watson rejected introspectionism as both unreliable and effete, and redefined psychology, instead, as the science of behaviour. The cognitive revolution, in turn, replaced the mind as the subject of study, and rejected both behaviourism and a reliance on introspection. This paper argues that all three stages of this history are largely mythical. Introspectionism was never a dominant movement within modern psychology, and the method of introspection never went away. Furthermore, this version of psychology’s history obscures some deep conceptual problems, not least surrounding the modern conception of ‘‘behaviour,’’ that continues to make the scientific study of consciousness seem so weird. Ó 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Introspection; Introspectionism; Behaviourism; Dualism; Watson; Wundt 1. Introduction Probably the most immediate result of the acceptance of the behaviorist’s view will be the elimination of self-observation and of the introspective reports resulting from such a method. (Watson, 1913b, p. 428). The problem of consciousness occupies an analogous position for cognitive psychology as the prob- lem of language behavior does for behaviorism, namely, an unsolved anomaly within the domain of an approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Running Head: a REVIEW and EVALUATION of an OPEN 1
    Running Head: A REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF AN OPEN 1 A Review and Evaluation of an Open-Source Mood Assessment, the Brief Mood Introspection Scale Rachael M. Cavallaro University of New Hampshire Victoria Bryan University of New Hampshire John D. Mayer University of New Hampshire A REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF AN OPEN 2 Abstract The Brief Mood Introspection Scale (BMIS) is an open-source, 16-item assessment of current mood regularly used in psychological research. The scale has two sets of scales: one pair of scales assesses mood using Pleasant-Unpleasant and Arousal-Calm dimensions; the other (less used alternative) assesses mood using Positive and Negative Affect. However, since its publication in 1988, there have been no systematic reports of its usage pattern, norms or of evidence for its validity. The present meta-analysis aims to (1) identify the nature of the studies that employed the BMIS (i.e. research areas and design), (2) establish the norms for the BMIS the scale means, standard deviations, and reliabilities, and (3) evaluate for the BMIS’s validity. One hundred and fifty studies that utilized the BMIS over a five-year timespan (2016-2011) were identified, including 27 studies that reported information pertinent to the scale’s norms. Our findings indicated that BMIS was primarily used in experimental research, and that its norms were similar to those from the original report. We make recommendations for use of Likert response scales and scoring conventions. A more qualitative review suggested that the Pleasant- Unpleasant mood scale had considerable evidence for its validity from its relation to criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilhelm Wundt & Herman Ebbinghaus Wilhelm Wundt & Herman
    1 2 Wilhelm Wundt & Herman Ebbinghaus Wilhelm Wundt & Herman Ebbinghaus 1. Wundt 2. Ebbinghaus A. Biographical details A. Biographical details B. Career history B. Career history C. Psychological theories C. Psychological theories D. Impact on Psychology D. Impact on Psychology Setting the Scene… 3 4 (After Darwin, Descartes (d. 1650) – psychologists William James (1890) – we consist of a preferred the study we are not automata; material body & of learning to that of consciousness selects immaterial soul consciousness) (Newton) Copernicus (1543): J.-O. la Mettrie (1748) Charles Darwin (1859) Wilhelm Wundt Sigmund Freud heliocentric theory of the L’Homme Machine – (On the Origin of Species) (1879) established (1899) – unconscious universe – Earth, and humans are just more – evolution by common first lab for study of more important than human race, are not the complex animals descent of all creatures human psychology consciousness centre of the universe Opposing views… 5 6 Humans are special. We’re not just smarter monkeys. Reflective self- consciousness (subjective experience) is unique to humans. It is too Wilhelm Wundt remarkable to have evolved for no reason. It permits selection. It creates (1832-1920) our experience of the world. It makes us care whether we live or die. William James Wilhelm Wundt Humans are not special – we are not the center of the universe. We’re just more complex animals on a little planet in an uncaring universe. Consciousness is not special (in any useful way) – it doesn’t produce our behavior; our behavior issues from unconscious processes shared with animals and generated by brains. Consciousness is an epiphenomenon.
    [Show full text]
  • Introspection Mark Engelbert and Peter Carruthers∗
    Advanced Review Introspection Mark Engelbert and Peter Carruthers∗ Two main questions about introspection are addressed: whether it exists, and whether it is a reliable source of self-knowledge. Most philosophers have assumed that the answers to both questions are positive, whereas an increasing number of cognitive scientists take the view that introspection is either nonexistent (with self-attributions of mental states being made on the same sort of interpretative basis as attributions of mental states to other people) or unreliable. A number of different models of self-knowledge are discussed, and the evidence bearing on the existence and reliability of introspection is reviewed. New experiments are required to tease apart some of the alternatives. 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. WIREs Cogn Sci 2010 1 245–253 hilosophers have traditionally assumed that the form of noninterpretative access is what is normally Phuman mind is largely transparent to itself.1–3 referred to as ‘introspection.’ (Some reserve the term The thesis of mental transparency can be divided into ‘introspection’ for those cases where one consciously a conjunction of two claims: (1) mental states are self- and deliberately pays attention to one’s mental states.4 presenting (if one is undergoing a given mental state, We will not follow this usage.) then one knows that one is) and (2) our knowledge of A distinction should be drawn between access mental states is infallible (if one believes that one is to our own mental states that is inferential and access undergoing a given mental state, then so one is). The that is interpretive. Many cognitive processes—in- scope of this thesis has generally been restricted to cluding perceptual processes like vision and language current mental events of judging, deciding, reasoning, parsing—are thought to be inferential in that they experiencing, imagining, and feeling, however.
    [Show full text]
  • Introspecting in the Twentieth Century Maja Spener (University of Birmingham)
    Introspecting in the Twentieth Century Maja Spener (University of Birmingham) Forthcoming in Philosophy of Mind in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries, A. Kind (ed.), Routledge. This version of the paper is only a draft. For quotation please consult the published version. Introspection in the 20th century is a vast topic. Discussions involving introspection figured in the relatively new discipline of experimental psychology, as well as in various debates in philosophy of mind and epistemology. Introspection has been a focus of interest as a method of investigation and as a psychological and epistemic capacity itself. Over the course of the century, these theoretical interests did not always connect well, although they have intersected and influenced each other at different points. But there is no helpful sense in which one might talk of ‘the history’ of introspection in the 20th century if by that one means a straight line of development across ten or so decades of psychological and philosophical theorizing with, and about, introspection. Instead, there is a criss-crossing pattern of various storylines and what I shall do here is track a couple of different strands in the overall pattern to the exclusion of many others.1 In particular, I shall concentrate on philosophers’ and psychologists’ use of introspection, and the discussions surrounding such use. A story we are often told is that during the late 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, experimental psychology was synonymous with introspectionism, exemplified by the work of Wilhelm Wundt and E. B. Titchener. According to the story, these early psychologists took the subject-matter of psychology to be conscious states only and their main method of investigation was introspection.
    [Show full text]
  • Wundt's "New Psychology"
    Wundt's "New Psychology" Wilhelm Wundt(1832-1920) was the first professional to call himself a psychologist. He founded one of the first psychological laboratories in Leipzig, Germany, in 1879. Wundt believed the "only certain reality is immediate experience" (Blumenthal, 1975). If psychology were to be a science, then psychologists would have to collect data about experience. To do this, Wundt used procedures similar to those developed by the psychophysicists. He arranged controlled laboratory settings. He carefully administered stimulation such as sounds and sights. He gathered information about how quickly people responded to a stimulus (reaction time) and what they experienced. Wundt believed these experiments would lead to a consensus or agreement among scientists about the nature of experience. Wilhelm Wundt Wundt's approach was not unreasonable. It resembled the way most natural sciences developed in the 1800s. Science like botany and zoology began with careful observation and an effort to arrive at consensual validation (agreement among different observers). For example, biologists began with careful descriptions of plants and animals before trying to classify them. Wundt believed the same approach would work in psychology. Careful scientific observers could simply look inside themselves to see the mind in action, and they should be able to agree on the basic phenomena of psychology. After agreeing about basic observations, they could do a deeper analysis of what they had found. The technique of "looking inside" to gather data about the mind is called introspection . The problem with Wundt's program is fairly obvious to those of us in the modern world, where differences between people are taken for granted.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nature of Mid-Life Introspection with the Goal of Understanding the Fullness, Or Essence, of the Experience
    Copyright 2014, Lee DeRemer Abstract I explore the nature of mid-life introspection with the goal of understanding the fullness, or essence, of the experience. I use research from interviews with nine people who have had deeply personal, highly intentional mid-life introspection experiences. In these interviews I seek to appreciate the motivation of the individuals, the dynamics of the experience, the role of others, lessons learned, and the impact on interviewees’ approach to questions of meaning and purpose. I also interview the spouses of six of the participants to obtain additional perspective on each introspection experience. I employ a transcendental phenomenological methodology to discover whether any aspects of the mid-life introspection experience are common, regardless of differences in world view, background, gender, occupation, education level, or socioeconomic status. By learning the stories of each of these mid-life introspection experiences, I discover the nature of mid-life introspection and develop the following definition of mid-life introspection: a deeply personal quest for a fresh understanding of one’s identity, purpose, values, goals, and life direction, influenced but not necessarily constrained by one’s life history and present circumstances. This research will enable the reader to conclude, “I understand the nature of mid-life introspection and what to expect from a mid-life introspection experience.” The research also reveals a framework that depicts the mid-life introspection experience graphically and a collection of questions that can guide one’s own mid-life introspection. iii Dedication This paper is dedicated to three people. I am who I am because of them, and I am forever grateful.
    [Show full text]
  • Consciousness and Introspection in Plotinus and Augustine Suzanne Stern-Gillet University of Bolton, [email protected]
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Bolton Institutional Repository (UBIR) University of Bolton UBIR: University of Bolton Institutional Repository Philosophy: Journal Articles (Peer-Reviewed) Philosophy 2007 Consciousness and Introspection in Plotinus and Augustine Suzanne Stern-Gillet University of Bolton, [email protected] Digital Commons Citation Stern-Gillet, Suzanne. "Consciousness and Introspection in Plotinus and Augustine." (2007). Philosophy: Journal Articles (Peer- Reviewed). Paper 1. http://digitalcommons.bolton.ac.uk/phil_journalspr/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Philosophy at UBIR: University of Bolton Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy: Journal Articles (Peer-Reviewed) by an authorized administrator of UBIR: University of Bolton Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 CONSCIOUSNESS AND INTROSPECTION IN PLOTINUS AND AUGUSTINE Suzanne Stern-Gillet I. Introduction Philosophers of mind and philosophical psychologists no longer care to rely on introspection as a method for investigating the human mind. From the early years of the twentieth century, introspection has gradually disappeared from the methods favored by serious philosophers and psychologists. This fading away is the object of William Lyons‟ well-known 1986 book, The Disappearance of Introspection. Curiously, if introspection has all but disappeared from the armory of philosophers and psychologists, it has survived as an exegetical category. It continues to be used routinely in accounts of Descartes‟ epistemology, it is unquestioningly applied to Augustine‟s De Trinitate and Confessions, and it regularly slips from the pen of practically anyone who writes on Plotinus‟ concept of soul, theory of dual selfhood or, indeed, mysticism.
    [Show full text]
  • John Watson Is to Introspectionism As James Berlin Is to Expressivism (And Other Analogies You Won't Find on the Sat)
    JOHN WATSON IS TO INTROSPECTIONISM AS JAMES BERLIN IS TO EXPRESSIVISM (AND OTHER ANALOGIES YOU WON’T FIND ON THE SAT) Maja Wilson I was in the Yale archives for the first time, reading the correspondence of early behaviorists John B. Watson and Robert M. Yerkes, and I couldn’t stop sneezing. A venerable looking scholar next to me, inspecting ancient manu- scripts with a magnifying glass, moved to the back of the room. Apparently, I was allergic to history. My very present problems had brought me to the archives: as a high school teacher, I had felt oppressed by the system of high stakes standardized testing mandated by No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The stated intent of NCLB was to promote equity, but the effects of testing seemed to be quite the opposite. Despite the modern rhetoric of equity associated with testing, I wondered if the original intent behind the creation of standardized tests foreshadowed the disastrous effects I saw playing out in schools. I knew that the first large scale standardized test in the United States—the Army Alpha Test (AAT)—had been created by eugenicists and used to promote their causes. Robert M. Yerkes, an avowed eugenicist, had helped create and administer the AAT during both World Wars. His assistant, Carl Brigham, pub- lished A Study of American Intelligence in 1923, in which he argued for “selective breeding” to preserve the integrity of the “Nordic race.” The AAT had revealed, according to Brigham, that southern and eastern Europeans had scored lowest on the test. Brigham’s book fueled growing anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States, and was used by Harry Laughlin, appointed by a House committee as an “expert eugenics agent,” to propose and pass the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924, which targeted eastern and southern Europeans.
    [Show full text]
  • Wundt's Psychological Experiment in the Light of His Philosophy of Science
    Psychol. Res. 42, 109-122 (1980) Psychological (Wundt Centennial Issue) Research © by Springer-Veflag• 1980 Wundt's Psychological Experiment in the Light of His Philosophy of Science Kurt Danziger York University, Ontario, Canada Summary. Wundt initiated the first systematic psychological research pro- gramme. This achievement occurred at the same time as his elaboration of a philosophy of science which was anti-inductivist and stressed the priority of explanatory motives. Specifically psychological explanations depended on concepts of psychological causality as manifested in apperceptive or volitional processes. The major differences between the Wundtian and other models of psychological experimentation can be understood in the light of this general approach. Thus experimenters and subjects had to be enlightened collabora- tors and the role of introspection was more significant in an explanatory than in a purely observational context. Wundt's special requirements for the psy- chological experiment led him to reject other early models as exemplified by the hypnotic experiment in which the experimenter-subject relationship was closer to what was to become the norm in the twentieth century. Introduction What earned Wundt a special place in the history of psychology was his laboratory, his experimental approach. His crucial contribution seems to fall in the area of meth- odology rather than in the area of substantive theoretical concepts or specific empiri- cal discoveries. But the exact nature of Wundt's major methodological contribution is not immedi- ately obvious. On the level of technique, whether in terms of hardware or in terms of procedure, he was associated with developments and improvements rather than with any original breakthrough.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychology Old and New
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons IRCS Technical Reports Series Institute for Research in Cognitive Science 1-1-2001 Psychology Old and New Gary Hatfield University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/ircs_reports Part of the Psychology Commons Hatfield, Gary, "Psychology Old and New" (2001). IRCS Technical Reports Series. 23. https://repository.upenn.edu/ircs_reports/23 University of Pennsylvania Institute for Research in Cognitive Science Technical Report No. IRCS-01-07. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/ircs_reports/23 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Psychology Old and New Abstract Psychology as the study of mind was an established subject matter throughout the nineteenth century in Britain, Germany, France, and the United States, taught in colleges and universities and made the subject of books and treatises. During the period 1870-1914 this existing discipline of psychology was being transformed into a new, experimental science, especially in Germany and the United States. The increase in experimentation changed the body of psychological writing, although there remained considerable continuity in theoretical content and non-experimental methodology between the old and new psychologies. This paper follows the emergence of the new psychology out of the old in the national traditions of Britain (primarily England), Germany, and the United States, with some reference to French, Belgian, Austrian, and Italian thinkers. The final section considers some methodological and philosophical issues in these literatures. Disciplines Psychology Comments University of Pennsylvania Institute for Research in Cognitive Science Technical Report No. IRCS-01-07.
    [Show full text]
  • Introducing Neuropsychology, Second Edition
    Introducing Neuropsychology Introducing Neuropsychology, second edition investi- edition, key topics are dealt with in separate focus gates the functions of the brain and explores the boxes, and “interim comment” sections allow the relationships between brain systems and human reader a chance to “take stock” at regular intervals. behaviour. The material is presented in a jargon-free, The book assumes no particular expertise on easy to understand manner and aims to guide the reader’s part in either psychology or brain students new to the field through current areas of physiology. Thus, it will be of great interest not only research. to those studying neuropsychology and cognitive Following a brief history of the discipline and a neuroscience, but also to medical and nursing description of methods in neuropsychology, the students, and indeed anyone who is interested in remaining chapters review traditional and recent learning about recent progress in understanding research findings. Both cognitive and clinical aspects brain–behaviour relationships. of neuropsychology are addressed to illustrate the advances scientists are making (on many fronts) in John Stirling has worked at Manchester Polytechnic/ their quest to understand brain–behaviour relation- MMU for over 30 years, teaching Bio- and Neuro- ships in both normal and disturbed functioning. The psychology, Psychopathology and Experimental rapid developments in neuropsychology and cogni- Design and Statistics. He has published over 30 tive neuroscience resulting from traditional research scientific journal articles, and three books. methods as well as new brain-imaging techniques are presented in a clear and straightforward way. Each Rebecca Elliott has worked at the University of chapter has been fully revised and updated and new Manchester for 8 years, using brain-imaging tech- brain-imaging data are incorporated throughout, niques to study emotion and cognition in psychiatric especially in the later chapters on Emotion and disorders.
    [Show full text]